When NOT To Use

• A one-off failure worth debugging directly (use superpowers:systematic-debugging)
• Rewriting the workflow's assets (use sanctum:workflow-improvement)

Workflow Monitor

Monitor workflow executions for errors and inefficiencies, automatically creating issues on the detected git platform (GitHub/GitLab) for improvements. Check session context for git_platform: and use Skill(leyline:git-platform) for CLI command mapping.

Philosophy

Workflows should improve over time. When execution issues occur, capturing them systematically enables continuous improvement. This skill hooks into workflow execution to detect problems and propose fixes.

Quick Start

Manual Invocation

# After a failed workflow
/workflow-monitor --analyze-last

# Monitor a specific workflow execution
/workflow-monitor --session <session-id>

# Analyze efficiency of recent workflows
/workflow-monitor --efficiency-report

Automatic Monitoring (via hooks)

When enabled, workflow-monitor observes execution and flags:

• Command failures (exit codes > 0)
• Timeout events
• Repeated retry patterns
• Context exhaustion
• Inefficient tool usage

Detection Patterns

Error Detection

Pattern	Signal	Severity
Command failure	Exit code > 0	High
Timeout	Exceeded timeout limit	High
Retry loop	Same command >3 times	Medium
Context exhaustion	>90% context used	Medium
Tool misuse	Wrong tool for task	Low

Efficiency Detection

Pattern	Signal	Threshold
Verbose output	>1000 lines from command	500 lines recommended
Redundant reads	Same file read >2 times	2 reads max
Sequential vs parallel	Independent tasks run sequentially	Should parallelize
Over-fetching	Read entire file when snippet needed	Use offset/limit

Workflow

Phase 1: Capture (workflow-monitor:capture-complete)

1. Log execution events - Commands, outputs, timing
2. Tag anomalies - Failures, timeouts, inefficiencies
3. Store evidence - For reproducibility

Phase 2: Analyze (workflow-monitor:analysis-complete)

1. Classify issues - Error type, severity, scope
2. Identify root cause - What triggered the issue
3. Suggest fix - What would prevent recurrence

Phase 3: Report (workflow-monitor:report-generated)

1. Generate issue body - Structured format
2. Assign labels - workflow, bug, enhancement
3. Link evidence - Command outputs, session info

Phase 4: Create Issue (workflow-monitor:issue-created)

1. Check for duplicates - Search existing issues
2. Create if unique - Via gh CLI
3. Link to session - For traceability

Issue Template

## Background

Detected during workflow execution on [DATE].

**Source:** [workflow name] session [session-id]

## Problem

[Description of the error or inefficiency]

**Evidence:**

[Command that failed or was inefficient] [Output excerpt]

## Suggested Fix

[What should change to prevent this]

## Acceptance Criteria

- [ ] [Specific fix criterion]
- [ ] Tests added for new behavior
- [ ] Documentation updated

---
*Created automatically by workflow-monitor*

Configuration

# .workflow-monitor.yaml
enabled: true
auto_create_issues: false  # Require approval before creating
severity_threshold: "medium"  # Only report medium+ severity
efficiency_threshold: 0.7  # Flag workflows below 70% efficiency

detection:
  command_failures: true
  timeouts: true
  retry_loops: true
  context_exhaustion: true
  tool_misuse: true

efficiency:
  verbose_output_limit: 500
  max_file_reads: 2
  parallel_detection: true

Guardrails

1. No duplicate issues - Check existing issues before creating
2. Approval required - Unless auto_create_issues: true
3. Evidence required - Every issue must have reproducible evidence
4. Rate limiting - Max 5 issues per session

Required TodoWrite Items

1. workflow-monitor:capture-complete
2. workflow-monitor:analysis-complete
3. workflow-monitor:report-generated
4. workflow-monitor:issue-created (if issue created)

Integration Points

• imbue:proof-of-work: Captures execution evidence
• sanctum:fix-workflow: Implements suggested fixes
• Hooks: Can be triggered by session hooks for automatic monitoring

Output Format

Efficiency Report

## Workflow Efficiency Report

**Session:** [session-id]
**Duration:** 12m 34s
**Efficiency Score:** 0.72 (72%)

### Issues Detected

| Type | Count | Impact |
|------|-------|--------|
| Verbose output | 3 | Medium |
| Redundant reads | 2 | Low |
| Sequential tasks | 1 | Medium |

### Recommendations

1. Use `--quiet` flags for npm/pip commands
2. Cache file contents instead of re-reading
3. Parallelize independent file operations

### Create Issues?

- [ ] Issue 1: Verbose output from npm install
- [ ] Issue 2: Redundant file reads in validation

Related Skills

• imbue:proof-of-work: Evidence capture methodology
• sanctum:fix-workflow: Workflow improvement command

---

Status: Skeleton implementation. Requires:

• Hook integration for automatic monitoring
• Efficiency scoring algorithm
• Duplicate detection logic

Exit Criteria

• All 4 TodoWrite phases completed: capture-complete, analysis-complete, report-generated, and (if an issue is created) issue-created
• Every issue filed contains reproducible evidence: the exact command that failed or was inefficient plus an output excerpt
• Duplicate check run via gh issue list --search before creating any issue; duplicate suppressed and existing issue URL reported instead
• No more than 5 issues created per session regardless of how many anomalies are detected; rate limit enforced